The Flagrant Fan

Friday, February 13, 2015

Rickie Weeks just signed a $2 million deal with the Seattle Mariners who happen to already have a second baseman named Robinson Cano. The deal is a pay cut for Weeks to the tune of 82%. Ouch. It doesn't seem that long ago that Rickie Weeks was an All Star and seemed to be one of the most dynamic players in the game. What the heck happened?

The timing of Week's descent from All Star to mediocre was not great for the Milwaukee Brewers. They based their 2012, three-year, $31 million contract for Weeks based on his five-year run beginning in 2007 of averaging 3.12 WAR a season with good pop, high on-base, stolen base and decent fielding skills. That contract was a bust in just about every way.

Beginning in 2009, Weeks had a three-year run of scoring a 120+ wOBA a season. 2010 was a particularly productive and break out season in which Weeks compiled over 300 total bases and got on base 276 times. Both were career highs as were his home runs, RBIs and runs scored that season. He led the league in getting hit by pitches in 2010 for the second time in his career.

Weeks missed about a third of the following season of 2011 but still scored in the same ranges in the time he did play. Thus, it might have seemed reasonable for the Brewers to extend the deal they made to their second baseman. It just didn't work out that way.

In 2012, the first year of the deal, Weeks played a full season and compiled 677 plate appearances. But his OPS dropped 90 points and his wRC+ dropped 27 points. According to the numbers, his defense also totally crapped out.

In 2010, Weeks was rated the second most valuable second baseman in baseball behind only Cano. In 2012, he was only the 20th best. But it would get worse...much worse.

Weeks started 2013 badly. He had a .615 OPS for April. It was even worse at .506 in May. He had a great June and seemed to be back to himself. But in July, he plummeted to .582. On August 8, mercifully, he was shut down for the rest of the season for a hamstring injury for which he had surgery and did not play again the rest of the season.

For 2013, in 399 plate appearances, he compiled a woeful triple slash line of: .209/.306/.357. Scooter Gennett finished out the season for the Brewers at second base and come on gangbusters (cliche alert) and was named the starting second baseman for the Brewers for 2014. Weeks was now a pretty expensive bench player.

The funny thing is, Rickie Weeks' bat bounced back. He played 57 times at second base and compiled an .861 OPS as a starter there. He also pinch hit 56 times with less success and DHed twice. But otherwise, he was no longer in the Brewers' plans. Add in the fact that his fielding was still abominable.

Since he played in only 104 games in 2013 and only 121 in 2014, he did not reach the totals necessary for his option for 2015 to kick in automatically. His Brewers days were over.

How are the Mariners going to use him? Obviously, they already have a VERY expensive second baseman on board. Weeks has never played a position other than second base in his entire MLB and MiLB career. Can he suddenly play the outfield? Will he be tried at third? First? It seems a rather strange signing.

Then again, if Weeks is back offensively, he is a right-handed batter and the Mariners have needed that in their lineup. Will he be the DH? It is hard to say what the M's are thinking when signing Weeks.

It might be a good thing for Weeks to learn a new position and rebuild his value. His annual salary took a beating and his former team gave up on him. Those two things can be highly motivational. The things we do know are that Weeks might not be done as a hitter but is quite done as a viable second baseman. The Mariners could still make that work and turn this head scratching into something none of us would have thought about.

Wednesday, February 11, 2015

There are times when emotions run smack into reality. And this post is one of those times. I have never been a big fan of Jon Jay of the St Louis Cardinals. I didn't think he was a bad player. He simply felt like an obstacle from others getting to play that I thought were better. In 2012 and 2013, I felt that Jay got in the way of Shane Robinson. Last year, I felt he got in the way of Peter Bourjos. I was wrong both times and now that he has signed a two-year, team-friendly deal, the Cardinals got quite a bargain.

You have to look at all the numbers before you can appreciate Jay very much. For example, I never would have guessed that Jay had a 112 wOBA for his career. In fact, in his five years with the Cardinals, Jay has never had a year with a wOBA less than a hundred. I never would have guessed that.

Next, I never would have pegged Jon Jay for having a career .359 OBP. Not only that, but for the last two seasons, Jay has been over .370 in the category. His combined on-base percentage over the last two years is the 25th best in baseball. I never would have guessed that.

Jay is a left-handed batter who is one of the few with very good splits against left-handed pitching. He only came to the plate 94 times against lefties in 2014, but he still had an OPS against them of .859 (much higher than against right-handeed pitchers). And Jay has a .718 OPS in his career against lefties.

Jay is also very consistent and not prone to bad months. His second half totals over the years are better (slightly) than his first half totals. But they are so close together, you barely notice them. It seems he is going to give you a good quality at bat each time he comes to the plate. His career 16% strikeout rate for his career is very reasonable for this age of strikeout rates through the roof.

If you just look at his ground ball to fly ball ratio, he looks rather Jeterish with many more ground balls than fly balls. It works out to a 2.33 career ratio. But, the ground balls work for him as he has a .278 BABIP on ground balls for his career. The MLB average is closer to .230.

Better yet, he hits a lot of line drives. His line drive percentage in 2013 was 26.7% and an incredible 28.3% in 2014. If you combine the last two seasons, Jon Jay has the fourth highest line drive percentage in baseball, trailing only Freddie Freeman, James Loney and Joe Mauer.

The success on ground balls and the amount of line drives leads to a high BABIP and he has been over .350 in that category for two of the last three seasons. Another factor of that is his willingness to hit to the opposite field. Jay has actually put more balls in play to the opposite field in his career than he has pulling the ball. And when he hits to the opposite field, his batting average is over .400!

The two weaknesses in Jay's offensive game are his lack of power and his fairly low walk rate. Hitting mostly line drives and ground balls, that leaves little way his batted balls can ever go over the fence. And his 6.0% walk rate in 2014 was below his career average of 6.8%, which is not very high. He will swing at pitches out of the strike zone 30% of the time or more.

All that said, Jon Jay is a solid offensive performer and has consistently been so for his entire career. He is not going to hit you the three-run homer, but he will hit for average and get on base better than league average.

I think some of the knock on Jay from people like me and others is that we see him the most in the post season and he has not had much success in the post season. And he misplayed a couple of balls in the outfield in the World Series against the Red Sox. "He takes bad routes to the ball," we are told. That may be, but his defense has been solid.

Jay finished with negative defensive marks in 2013. But the year before and then last year in 2014, the marks have been above average. There is no denying that he has a really weak arm and can't throw very well. But he is not going to kill you in center according to the numbers.

Looking through Jon Jay's numbers have been a surprise and I guess I can shut up now. Jay has averaged 2.24 WAR per season and 2.58 over the last four. In today's market, that makes him roughly a $12.9 million player. That said, his recent contract will pay him $10.98 million (total) for the next two years. The Cardinals have done a nice job here of going to the department store and signing a player for half off. That's quite the deal.P.S. Several mentioned on Twitter that Jay's deal was not a bargain since Jay was 2nd Year arbitration eligible. Well...I know that. But I still peg his value at $12.9 million and Jay is giving up his right to have a hearing for much more next year, so my point still stands.

Tuesday, January 27, 2015

Rob Manfred has been the commissioner of Major League Baseball for less than a month and already he is making me very nervous. It is apparent that he is not happy about the current state of offense in the game. In an interview with Karl Ravech, Manfred said he wanted to "inject some offense into the game." Interesting choice of words there, Mr. Commissioner.

There have been five historic ways to "inject" offense. There is expansion where teams are added and the talent pool of good pitching gets floated with pitchers who would not ordinarily make the cut. It is not a coincidence that Roger Maris hit 61 homers the year of an expansion. Although Bud Selig did mention expansion on his way out, anything imminent is not in sight.

The second historic way to increase offense is to lower the mound. This was famously done after 1968's historic "Year of the Pitcher." With the constant threat to pitcher's arms, this one sounds dangerous to consider.

The third way to increase offense is to fudge the baseballs. Many theorize that the flood of home run balls after the last baseball stoppage had less to do with steroids and more to do with the baseball.

The fourth way is to mess around with the strike zone. Calling it tighter helps offense. Calling it looser helps the pitchers (hello Tom Glavine).

And finally, there are performance enhancing drugs. And that is why I got such a kick out of Manfred's choice of words. Injecting is something baseball has tried very hard to eliminate from the game.

While all five of these scenarios change the game to a degree, they do not, of themselves, change how the game is played. The rules of play stay the same except for measuring the mound. What Rob Manfred is talking about is to change the rules of play. And that does not make me a happy camper.

I do not like less offense as an observer of the sport. Lord knows, I have ranted over the current state of strikeouts in the game. I have hated the sight of player after player refusing to try and stop the infield shift. But I also have followed the sport long enough to know that offense and pitching are cyclical to a degree and the conditions of this era will not be the same as the next.

As someone who would rather not see a bunch of .230 hitters with .290 on-base percentage who strike out 150 times a year, I do not want to fiddle with the rules of play just to make more runs happen. I don't like artificially changing the rules to change the game. Pitch clocks make me squirm in the same way.

But, William, you might ask, haven't they already changed rules like the Buster Posey rule at home plate and the take out side at second? Well, yes. But in the case of the former, you are protecting players (which worked by the way) and a player still has to try to score while the other team tries to prevent it. In the latter, you are simply enforcing base line running rules already in place.

But eliminating shifts is a totally another ballgame. You are limiting teams from placing their fielders where they desire to place them. This is a huge and fundamental rule shift that limits what a team can do defensively. Are infielders going to have boxes like coaching boxes where they have to stay? That would be ugly.

As others have already pointed out (Dave Cameron for example), BABIP hasn't changed all that much with the exponential growth in the use of shifts. The biggest problem in baseball is that there are less balls in play than ever before. Strikeouts have never been higher in the history of baseball. So what's next then? If you want to inject offense, change a strikeout to four strikes. No thank you.

How far can you take this once you start this kind of tinkering? Are you going to force teams with big ballparks to bring in their outfield walls? Are you going to eliminate how many relief pitchers a team can use?

The interview brought up the subject of there being a lot of smart people in the game. Those smarts have figured out how to use data to place fielders where batters tend to hit most of their balls in play. Those same people have figured out how to exploit batters for more strikes and swings and misses.

Just as smart people have brought the shifts to baseball, the same smart people can find ways for offenses to beat those shifts. Players with big swing and miss potential will not always be in vogue. Like I said, these things are cyclical. Let the game progress naturally. Baseball will always be about the intrigue of how one team tries to get an edge to beat its opponent. Just leave it alone.

The interview linked above was the first time we got a real chance to hear from Rob Manfred. And frankly, it was a little chilling to hear his mindset of artificially adding offense to the game. It is a terrible idea to change the way baseball is played on the field and doing so should always be done with extreme caution and care.

Performance Enhancing Drugs were such a problem because in many people's minds, it altered the outcomes of statistics in what has always been a traditional game. It was the artificial enhancement that people objected to. "Injecting offense" has the same artificial feel and to me puts such artificial means in the same category as PEDs. Please don't go there, Mr. Manfred. Just don't.

Sunday, January 04, 2015

This must be my morning for mixed feelings. I just wrote about the Dan Haren situation and now I am writing about the Baseball Bloggers Association (BBA). If you haven't heard by now, the BBA has a new president in Niko Goutakolis and he has asked me to be the vice-president. Goutakolis seems to have the energy and ambition to run with this thing and that is a good thing. He asked me to take my position as Veep to balance the young with the old. The old would be me.

I owe a lot to the BBA. Through my association with the association (which works if you think about it), I have "met" lots of people I treasure on Twitter and have even met a few in person. A good chunk of my regular readership comes from these folks I have come to know through the BBA.

As such, I became a chapter president of one of the largest chapters in the BBA and did what I could to promote the writers that were under me. I did link posts, etc. I would like to think it helped, at least a little bit.

But I have also become one of the BBA's most vocal critics in the past few years. Frankly, I was disappointed...so much so that I gave up my chapter presidency because I didn't see the point.

The Baseball Bloggers Association has always been a great idea. It was founded by a very good and very popular man and through his skills grew to include some pretty high-octane writers as well as providing a place for up and coming writers to have a voice and a community. As the world was moving from printed media to online markets, the BBA was timed perfectly to form an association of those of us who developed our online niche.

But a few years ago it bogged down. The founder had small children, his own business and another association around his team that occupied his time. It is understandable that he ran aground on personal resources to take the BBA to the next step. He stepped down and that did not bring improvement.

A post I shared here led to an upheaval of sorts and the founder took back the presidency and hope was raised. But his time constraints had not eased or changed and sometimes the entrepreneur is not the guy to take a company to the next level.

So here we are after basically four years of stagnation and deflation. Other groups have passed us by. There has been no spark and no energy. We have not gone to the next level but have had our roof bowed by really heavy snow.

Mr. Goutakolis has repeatedly asked me to make a statement. I'm not quite sure this is what he had in mind (wan smile). I agreed to be his vice president for two reasons. First, there is still that measure of gratitude for what my membership has meant to me. Second, if I was going to be vocal in my discontent, how could I not want to be part of the solution if there is one?

So far, I like the energy and communication I see from our new president. I hope he can get the BBA moving. There is so much to be done. The BBA needs to be a real mechanism for promotion of its members. It needs to rebuild its reputation within the baseball writing community. The BBA needs to focus on quality writing and be judicious in who can join. There needs to be avenues of cooperation and perhaps even regional meetings to bring writers together. Perhaps there should be a fee involved to be a member so there is a budget to accomplish something.

There needs to be better structure to voting for awards and participation by members is not optional. Either you participate in these votes or you are not a member. Our press releases need to become news. As our members move up in their writing careers, we should be featuring them and taking some credit for the advancement. Our involvement with the BBA should mean something on our resumes.

On the personal side, Niko Goutakolis' request of me couldn't have come to me at a lower ebb. After writing nearly 4,000 long form posts over the last eleven years, I'm a little toasted and have had a bit of a block in my writing in the last few months. I have always been nothing but prolific, but have struggled to put up posts lately. Perhaps at my low energy cycle, it would have been fairer to Mr. Goutakolis if I had politely declined.

But I didn't. There is a certain "put your money where your mouth is" that goes along with my acceptance. Therefore I am willing to give this a try and support our new president.

He's got a tough row to hoe, to use a trite expression. After years of stagnation, it's now or never for the BBA. Either we take the next step or it becomes meaningless to continue. I will do what I can to help. Let's give this thing a push, shall we? Perhaps it is not too late to find the torrent in the stream.

I have been having this internal debate about Dan Haren's position about pitching for the Marlins for about two weeks now. Every time I get a handle on how I feel about how he is handling this trade to the East Coast, my emotions turn the other way.

We can all understand Dan Haren's desire to stay close to his family on the West Coast and he signed his free agent contract out there to facilitate his desire. Family is a noble thing. I once turned down a sure $160 grand job in Georgia because I did not want to leave my daughter behind. I get it. In fact, I should get it more than most.

One of the main differences in my situation and Haren's is that I was not under contract. I did not sign a piece of paper in good faith that said I would perform XYZ expectations in return for a financial gain. Haren did sign such a piece of paper.

He has made perfect use of the collective bargaining agreement to earn himself $71 million in his career playing baseball. He is signed another $10 million to do so again in 2015. His contract did not include a no-trade agreement although there is some murkiness as to what was promised him when he signed.

In fact, Haren has earned $35 million in the last three years being a less than league-average pitcher. In this age of pitching, his FIP has been over four for three straight years. But that's not really fair as he is more or less getting paid what he couldn't make when he was younger and was really worth something as a pitcher.

He has already told the Marlins (according to the linked story) that he doesn't want to play there. He is basically asking them to trade him back out West. All this speculation has caused mlbtraderumors.com to put up a poll on where he will end up. The biggest choice so far is that he will retire. Really?

Has he made enough money to throw away $10 million? For all his lack of success the last three years, he is a strike-throwing machine who has made thirty-plus starts ten years in a row. That kind of durability will get you a good contract somewhere on the open market once his obligation for 2015 is over.

Would he really leave all that money on the table? If the Marlins cannot, or will not trade him, would he just quit? Or would he sit out a year? Why can't he just rent out a bungalow in Miami for a season and move his family there? He certainly has the money. It is a temporary inconvenience for the family en route to millions of dollars of potential earnings.

The decision would seem to be easy. Miami has a spacious ballpark. One can see Haren building back his reputation as a starter and freeing him to play his hand in 2016.

Let's think about Miami's position for a moment. They already have their $10 million from the Dodgers. They got paid whether Haren pitches for them or not. If Haren sits home with his millions, they still have their money and won't have to shell it out. If he plays for them, they can pencil in 30 starts, which is still something. Or they can trade him and get value knowing that a trade partner would basically pay Haren nothing to pitch for them.

What would you do if you were the Marlins? Frankly, I would call his bluff. If you want to throw away $10 million smackers, have yourself a nice day. The collective bargaining agreement between the players and the teams is pretty fair. And the fact is that he is under contract.

So what happens if Haren sits out the year? What should baseball do then? Should he be allowed to play 2016 when he effectively broke his contract? I don't know the answer to that and what the provisions are for that circumstance.

What I do know is that I am no closer to resolving this moral dilemma for myself. I know it doesn't matter what *I* think. But I am sure that I am not the only one thinking about Haren's situation.

Where I am, basically, is where I started. Dan Haren has made his millions and owes no man anything and can walk away if he wants to. He owes baseball nothing except for that contract he signed in good faith. That contract and the fact that baseball has been the means of his family having the lifestyle they lead swing me over to the other side of the moral reading.

Monday, December 22, 2014

We have become so used to the Tampa Bay Rays being the smartest kids on the block that last year's down season seemed unreal. Now, after a turbulent off season that has seen two pieces of the brain trust leave for greener pastures, are the Rays still the Rays? Well, they still have Evan Longoria and Tropicana Field, so there's that. But who or what is this team now?

The body blows actually began last year when David Price was dealt to the Tigers. Price, more than any other Rays player was the face of that team. His presence on Twitter, his personality and, of course, his talent on the field made him a star. A bit of the genius luster came off on what was perceived to be little return for Price with the trade.

As soon as the 2014 season was over, Andrew Friedman bolted to the Dodgers. Friedman was long considered one of the best front office people anywhere. His departure also created a loophole in Joe Maddon's contract. Maddon opted out and after a brief courtship and bidding war, he has now gone to manage the Cubs.

Whether the reputation is earned or not, Maddon had become the model of what a great manager was supposed to look like. He was the master motivator and innovator. He helped turn what was a devil of a franchise into a winning one. He made other managers over-manage to try to keep up with him. If Friedman was one part of the brain, then Maddon was the other along with being the heart of the franchise.

This should go without saying, but time will tell on how these trades all work out. But from this early standpoint, only two of all those prospects netted by all those trades are ranked by Baseball Prospectus. Add them to the Price trade haul and all the deals feel more like salary dumps than strategic moves.

David Price's departure hurts, but the pitching still looks like the most impressive part of this team. Alex Cobb has become a star. Chris Archer was terrific until it seemed like he hit a wall in the second half. He should benefit from that experience. Matt Moore will be back in the early part of the season. Jake Odorizzi can be as good as Hellickson or better. Drew Smyly has a chance to be very good. The only real question in the rotation is Alex Colome, but he is a highly rated prospect who has shown poise in his two cups of coffee.

And so the pitching looks solid at least with perhaps a hole or two that time will sort out. But the offense, already 14th in the American League last year in OPS has taken more of a hit than the pitching.

I cannot understand giving up on Wil Myers, but perhaps they had their reasons. Longoria was finally healthy and played all 162 games. But his output offensively was surprisingly mundane. Desmond Jennings has to be considered a disappointment thus far. Ben Zobrist has been great, but will be 34 in 2015. Other than those guys, there is a whole lot of meh in the rest of the lineup.

The other bothersome thing about the offense that is currently constructed is that it is overly right-handed in a park that seems to favor left-handed batters more. Both catchers are right-handed and of a really weak bench, only Nick Franklin is a switch-hitter who shows some promise and is at least young enough to emerge from the group.

With the Rays' 2014 finish, perhaps some of the mystique was already gone on these upstart Rays. After an impressive run of success, everything came to a screeching halt last season and only a late-season surge prevented them from fighting the Red Sox for the bottom spot in the AL East.

A year later, with their GM and manager gone and several players becoming more expensive gone as well, it is difficult to gauge who this team is now. Has the sun set on this Rays team or is a new dawn about to begin? The former seems more likely than the latter, but time will tell. The only thing that is sure about the 2015 Rays: They will feel really different.

Sunday, December 07, 2014

Way back in the early days of this site, I used to do my own unusual take on the MLB transaction wire. It was mostly for my own amusement as the ratio of people who thought the posts were stupid to those who liked them was about 12 to 2. But, what else is there to do when the snow is blowing and it is six degrees outside? You have to do something when living in the frozen tundra. For old time sake and for my amusement, I bring you my own particular spin on this week's transaction wire.

First Ibarra your pardon since this is my take when Edgar Ibarra gets signed to a minor league deal by the Angels. He hopes to barra a cup of coffee at least.

Ryan's pitching career is officially in the Dempster. But have no fear, the man landed on his feet and Ryan Dempster will work in the Cubs' front office.

Drew Butera is in the market for a new job as he was designated by the Dodgers. Chicago has a Butera Market so maybe he should go there. Or, since he is already in LA, he should apply at Barclay Butera. Heck, he might catch on in the furniture business.

Ryan Lavarnway is the reason Butera lost his job. Now Ryan will have to learn the Dodgerway. While in LA, he could do a new show called Lavarnway and Shirleyway.

Shane rode off in the sunset but Yankee fans of Shane Greene yelled, ""Shane! Come back!" Now he can say to Yankee players he didn't like, ""I hear that you're a low-down, Yankee liar."

Meanwhile, the Yankees got Didi Gregorius. His last name reminds me of "Gregarious." But to Matthew Kory, it reminds him of Gregorian. I'll go with Matty and hope that the Yankee fans will be chanting his name. I don't think I can say, "Didi," with a straight face though and will call him, "Mariekson."

And that's all they need in Arizona is another Robbie Ray of sunshine. But the best pun came from Diane Firstman who said on Twitter, "Diamondbacks / Tigers trade talks were Leyba intensive." That was a good one.

In the Danish language, "Barme," means bosoms. Does that mean that the Padres have taken Clint Barmes to heart by signing him?

On the signing of Kevin Cash as manager, one of the folks on Twitter I follow had the best line. I wish I could remember who it was, "This is the first time the Rays have used Cash to improve." Killer.

It's a good thing he is the Cubs' new first base coach instead of a third base coach where Cubs fans could either think his decisions were Dr. Jekyll or Mr. Brandon Hyde.

It doesn't matter if you are a Star Trek Picard man or a Kirkman as Texas signed Michael Kirkman to a minor league deal.

It's not the same guy, but the Rangers also signed Alex Rodriguez as trainer of the AZL Rangers. Frightening to think of A-Rod as a trainer.

After the Royals agreed to terms with Luke Hochevar, they hope Luke will be a force for good in the bullpen.

The Twins brought back Torii Hunter home. But while Torii might be a Hunter of gays because of his religion, it apparently doesn't stop him from cursing out a reporter.

I thought the trade between Seattle and Toronto exchanging Michael Saunders for J.A. Happ was a big win for the Blue Jays and Happ-less for the Mariners.

Speaking of the Blue Jays, they took a flyer on Justin Smoak. The fact that Justin was once considered a great prospect makes me wonder if those scouts were smoaking something funny.

Things were not beachy for Brandon Beachy as the Braves non-tendered him.

The Red Sox definitely left their heart for Juan Francisco as he didn't last very long on their roster.

Apparently, the Royals did not think Francisley Bueno was bueno enough as he was non-tendered.

The Dodgers hope Darwin Barney's offense will evolve as they signed him to a deal. But it wasn't a lot of money so the contract should not become a big dinosaur.

The Mets will not be forever Young after trading Chris Young last year and non-tendering Eric Young, Jr. this week. But they can be for-Everth young if they sign the non-tendered Everth Cabrera to be their shortstop.

Things were not caviar and champagne for Chaz Roe as he was non-tendered.

And finally, a pitcher left in a David Huff as the Yankees non-tendered David Hassle Huff.

Saturday, December 06, 2014

It has not shocked me in recent weeks to read stories about Jayson Werth getting ten days in jail or the varied reports on people like Bill Cosby or Adrian Peterson. Those who are fortunate enough to become very good at high visibility skills such as sports and entertainment are artificially built as superstars. But they are people. Just as we are all people.

Hero worship has never been a problem for me. From the earliest age, I seemed to have a build in knowledge that we are all created equal. And as much as it pains the modern person, those ideals came from a Judeo-Christian mindset. I happen to believe them. We are all just people muddling our way through life as best we can. At its basest level, we all are birthed in a bloody mess and eat and poop and sleep...even star players and entertainers.

I did have heroes growing up. I loved Mickey Mantle and Mel Stottlemyre and others. But my hero thing was based on enjoying what they did on the ball field and the familiarity of having watched them regularly. I've written myriads of thousands of words on Derek Jeter as a fan of his game and not not on his "mystique" or image.

Much of hero worship has come from writers and journalists. The Old West was a real starting point as writers built false images of Davy Crockett, Wyatt Earp and outlaws like Billy the Kid. Sports writers carried on that tradition and built legends out of Babe Ruth, Ted Williams and Hank Aaron. Jeter is just the latest to be lionized beyond reality.

You see it with this image of Torii Hunter as the ultimate team guy and we on Twitter now have a lot of fun at poking holes at "scrappy" players. The bottom line is how a player performs and how his team fares, but we still have writers who make a living creating legends that go beyond results.

Part of the reason stat-based writers have risen to such heights is that in this post-Watergate era, many have swung the other way and love when icons are brought down from the lofty spots they hold in public imagination. Ryan Howard became a lightning rod between the myth-makers and Howard's RBI totals and stat-based writers who poked holes in his game.

So we have kind of come to a weird place in the history of public perception. There are those looking for demons behind every celebrity's tree and those that are still creating icons. Both still sell, which makes it all that much more confusing.

When I first moved to northern Maine and went back to school (some twenty-four years ago now), I worked at a hotel for three years. That will open your eyes about the human race. George Mitchell was the second most powerful man in the country at the time and used to call for a room. If reservations were full, his handlers would insist I find a place for him.

My answer was, "Let me give you a list of the reservations and you can tell me who I should tell not to come."

The answer was always, "Do you know who George Mitchell is?"

My answer was always, "I don't care if he is the Pope, I don't have a room."

I once had to deal with a national news correspondent for one of networks. One day he came down the elevator and asked how much the paper was. I said, "For you, it's free." His answer was that just because he was on TV, I didn't have to give him a paper for free. I told him politely that all of our customers get a free paper and that's what I meant.

The actor who played the lead on the early television show, Dark Shadows, stayed for a week. Every single day I had to show him how to get to the hotel restaurant.

They are all just people. Just like we are all just people. When I hear writers talking about those suspected of using Performance Enhancing Drugs (PEDs) as, "Cheaters," it gets to me because they were just people making a decision about what could make them more money more effective at what they did. Which of us would avoid that decision if it could mean millions of dollars and the Majors versus the Minors? Apparently, a large share of the baseball player population made that decision. Few resisted. And yet we judge those we know about because of that same George Mitchell. Funny that.

When I view sports--particularly baseball as that is my wheelhouse--I view and am entertained by the performance in the scheme of the game. I view actors in a movie the same way. They are skilled people performing a skill-seeking task. I watch a good carpenter the same way. Performance is entertaining. Skill is entertaining.

But skill has never equaled a higher grade of person for me. I admire the work of a great carpenter, but I don't think that carpenter is better than the person who makes a mean sundae at Friendly's. And frankly, the president of the United States can be of any skin color, gender or sexual orientation as long as they do a good job.

Having such a view means that I am not heartbroken when Ryan Braun gets caught or fall for stories about how great a guy Torii Hunter is.

People are people. Those who get paid a lot of money are just like you and me. Just like us, they make a thousand decisions a day and just like us, some of those decisions can be costly. I try very hard not to judge others and I will not judge players or famous people who get caught up in scandal. There is a higher power who will do that judging.

And on the other side of the coin, I do not build idols of gold for players or the famous because they are skillful at a high-profile career. They either entertain me or they do not. Nothing more and nothing less. I encourage you to view them this same way and teach your children the same way. We are all created equal. Some just get paid better than others.

Followers

Privacy Policy

The Flagrant Fan (Glimmer Tree, LLC) knows that you care about how your personal information is used and shared, and we take your privacy very seriously. Please read the following to learn more about our privacy policy. By visiting our website, you are accepting the practices outlined in this Privacy Policy. This Privacy Policy covers The Flagrant Fan's treatment of personal information that The Flagrant Fan gathers when you are on the The Flagrant Fan website and when you use The Flagrant Fan services. This policy does not apply to the practices of third parties that The Flagrant Fan does not own or control, or to individuals that The Flagrant Fan does not employ or manage.

Information Collected by The Flagrant Fan: We only collect personal information that is relevant to the purpose of our website. This information allows us to provide you with a customized and efficient experience. We do not process this information in a way that is incompatible with this objective. We collect the following types of information from our The
Flagrant Fan users: 1. Information You Provide to Us: We receive and store any information you enter on our website or provide to us in any other way. You can choose not to provide us with certain information, but then you may not be able to take advantage of many of our special features. 2. automatic Information: o We receive and store certain types of information whenever you interact with us. The Flagrant Fan and its authorized agents automatically receive and record
certain "traffic data" on their server logs from your browser including your IP address, The Flagrant Fan cookie information, and the page you requested. The Flagrant Fan uses this traffic data to help diagnose problems with its servers, analyze trends and administer the website. o The Flagrant Fan may collect and, on any page, display the total counts that page has been viewed. o Many companies offer programs that help you to visit websites anonymously. While The Flagrant Fan will not be able to provide you with a personalized experience if we cannot recognize you, we want you to be aware that these programs are available. E-mail Communications The Flagrant Fan is very concerned about your privacy and we will never provide your email address to a third party without your explicit permission, as detailed in
the "Sharing Your Information" section below. The Flagrant Fan may send out e-mails with The Flagrant Fan-related news, products, offers, surveys or promotions. CookiesCookies are alphanumeric identifiers that we transfer to your computer's hard drive through your Web browser to enable our systems to recognize your browser and tell us how and when pages in our website are visited and by how many people. The Flagrant Fan cookies do not collect personal information, and we do not combine information collected through cookies with other personal information to tell us who you are or what your screen name or e-mail address is. The "help" portion of the toolbar on the majority of browsers will direct you on how to prevent your browser from accepting new cookies, how to command the browser to tell you when you receive a new cookie, or how to fully disable cookies. We recommend that you leave the cookies activated because cookies allow you to use some of The Flagrant Fan's coolest features. The Flagrant Fan's advertising partners may place a cookie on your browser that makes it possible to collect anonymous non-personally identifiable information that ad delivery systems use to present more relevant ads. If you would prefer to opt-out of this standard practice, please visit our advertising partner Platform-A's privacy policy and opt-out page. Sharing Your Information Rest assured that we neither rent nor sell your personal information to anyone and that we will share your personal information only as described below. The Flagrant Fan Personnel: The Flagrant Fan personnel and authorized consultants and/or contractors may have access to user information if necessary in the normal
course of The Flagrant Fan business. Business Transfers: In some cases, we may choose to buy or sell assets. In these types of transactions, user information is typically one of the business assets that is transferred. Moreover, if The Flagrant Fan, or substantially all of its assets, were acquired, user
information would be one of the assets that is transferred. Protection of The Flagrant Fan and Others: We may release personal information when we believe in good faith that release is necessary to comply with a law; to enforce or apply our Terms of Use and other policies; or to protect the rights, property, or safety of The Flagrant Fan, our employees, our users, or others. This includes exchanging information with other companies and organizations for fraud protection and
credit risk reduction. Syndication: The Flagrant Fan allows for the RSS syndication of all of its public content within the The
Flagrant Fan website. With Your Consent: Except as noted above, we will contact you when your personal information is shared with third parties or used for a purpose incompatible
with the purpose(s) for which it was originally collected, and you will be able to opt out to prevent the sharing of this information. Children Under 18 Years of Age You must be 13 years and older to register to use the The Flagrant Fan website. As a result, The Flagrant Fan does not specifically collect information about children. If we learn that The Flagrant Fan has collected information from a child under the age of 13, we will delete that information as quickly as possible. We recommend that minors between the ages of 13 and 18
ask and receive their parents' permission before using The Flagrant Fan or sending information about themselves or anyone else over the Internet. Changes to this Privacy Policy The Flagrant Fan may amend this Privacy Policy from time to time, at its sole discretion. Use of information we collect now is subject to the Privacy Policy in effect at the time such information is used. If we make changes to the Privacy Policy, we will notify you by posting an announcement on the The
Flagrant Fan website so you are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances if any, it is disclosed. Conditions of Use If you decide to visit The Flagrant Fan website, your visit and any possible dispute over privacy is subject to this Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use, including limitations on damages, arbitration of disputes, and application of California state law. Effective Date of this Privacy Policy This Privacy Policy is effective as of October 21, 2010 and last updated October 21, 2010.